It seems we weren't the only ones to spot a lack of substance in the Waterways Minister's statement earlier in the week.
Tristram Hunt, MP for Stoke-on-Trent Central, asked the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Caroline Spelman) about her plans for the future of British Waterways. Waterways Minister Richard Benyon repeated what he had said in his statement a few days earlier that the government would be "looking in detail at options for a third sector model that will be appropriate for British Waterways, including the possible inclusion of Environment Agency navigations", adding that no decisions would be taken until after the spending review.
Unsurprisingly, Mr Hunt sought more detail, stating that "in order to become a proper third sector organisation, British Waterways needs an appropriate financial settlement following the comprehensive spending review and a longer contract with Government to replace annual grants". He asked whether British Waterways' property endowment could be put in a charity-locked mechanism, so that the Treasury "does not sell it down the canal".
The minister, in reply, did give some sort of re-assurance: "The answer to his question is yes. For the third sector model to work, British Waterways will have to have access to its estate, or a large proportion of it, for it to gear up funding for sustainable funding in the future. I can assure him that it will not proceed unless it is locked in in that way."
So he seemed to be saying that if BW is to move to the "third-sector" this would be properly funded, seemingly retaining a large proportion of its property, so that it would be sustainable in the future. He also seemed to be saying that the third-sector move would not take place unless it was properly funded.
As we suggested on Tuesday, a half-baked, cash-starved, third-rate new organisation would be the worst possible outcome, so we suppose we must take some comfort from whatever crumbs of good news appear on the table!
The text of the exchange can be read in full here.
.
Friday 25 June 2010
Tuesday 22 June 2010
New Minister Announces, er... Nothing
We now have a new government minister with responsibility for the waterways, in the person of Richard Benyon MP. Some people have expressed high hopes for MR Benyon, as he is a riparian landowner alongside the Kennet and Avon Canal and has an involvement with the Kennet and Avon Trust.
This week, Mr Benyon issued a statement about the waterways. Or rather, he got someone to make the statement on his behalf in the House of Lords. This could be interpreted as indicating that waterways are so low down on the government's priorities that they couldn't even find a few seconds for Mr Benyon to make his statement in the House of Commons himself!
His message gives a rather mixed message. He said that the new Government would continue to look at the possibility of creating a "third sector" model for British Waterways, as this may fit neatly with the government's so-called "big society" philosophy.
However, he warned that nothing could be decided before the outcome of the Government's Autumn Spending Revue, as the Government's main objective was to reduce the deficit.
He gave the same reason for his decision not to proceed with a new Government waterways strategy. (Can he be referring to Defra's "Waterways for Everyone" strategy? What are the implications if this is abandoned?)
Mr Benyon also suggested that any "third-sector" waterway body could include the Environment Agency's navigations (such as the Thames, the Nene and the Great Ouse). This suggestion has been welcomed by the IWA, which has campaigned for a nation waterway "conservancy" but is likely to be fiercely opposed by many boaters based on EA waters.
Today's Budget statement talked of most government departments facing financial cutbacks of 25% so there must be very little hope of any improvement in waterway funding for years to come. If BW is to evolve into a third-sector organisation or if a national waterway conservancy covering BW and EA navigations was to be created, just how effective would they be if they are not set up on a sound financial basis? A half-baked, cash-starved, third-rate new organisation would surely be the worst possible outcome for the secure future of our waterways?
The text of Mr Benyon's statement, as relayed by Lord Henley, can be read in full here.
.
This week, Mr Benyon issued a statement about the waterways. Or rather, he got someone to make the statement on his behalf in the House of Lords. This could be interpreted as indicating that waterways are so low down on the government's priorities that they couldn't even find a few seconds for Mr Benyon to make his statement in the House of Commons himself!
His message gives a rather mixed message. He said that the new Government would continue to look at the possibility of creating a "third sector" model for British Waterways, as this may fit neatly with the government's so-called "big society" philosophy.
However, he warned that nothing could be decided before the outcome of the Government's Autumn Spending Revue, as the Government's main objective was to reduce the deficit.
He gave the same reason for his decision not to proceed with a new Government waterways strategy. (Can he be referring to Defra's "Waterways for Everyone" strategy? What are the implications if this is abandoned?)
Mr Benyon also suggested that any "third-sector" waterway body could include the Environment Agency's navigations (such as the Thames, the Nene and the Great Ouse). This suggestion has been welcomed by the IWA, which has campaigned for a nation waterway "conservancy" but is likely to be fiercely opposed by many boaters based on EA waters.
Today's Budget statement talked of most government departments facing financial cutbacks of 25% so there must be very little hope of any improvement in waterway funding for years to come. If BW is to evolve into a third-sector organisation or if a national waterway conservancy covering BW and EA navigations was to be created, just how effective would they be if they are not set up on a sound financial basis? A half-baked, cash-starved, third-rate new organisation would surely be the worst possible outcome for the secure future of our waterways?
The text of Mr Benyon's statement, as relayed by Lord Henley, can be read in full here.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)